Critical Thinking vs. Dogmatic Violence

You know the stereotype: a narrow minded and sinister looking man in a balaclava with a small bomb in the one hand and a Kalashnikov in the other. It is the modern version of the Bogey Man. Unfortunately, it is in many cases a correct picture of terrorists. But all militant activists are not like this. There are justifications of political violence that are not dogmatic. Physical force based on self-defence or necessity is not dogmatic. It is not part of an ideological or political agenda. It always presupposes critical thinking and a will to change ones opinions when they are refuted by facts and well-founded arguments.

Defensive political violence is not connected to any philosophical school. It is just as much in harmony with postmodernism as with Catholic scholasticism. Basically, violence is always evil, at best a necessary evil, so this website begs critics to deconstruct the justifications of defensive political violence that are presented here. Nothing is better if all justifications of violence are refuted ones and for all. Violence may be necessary in some emergency situations, but it will always be appalling and gruesome. This is the message to our critics: please take this website apart, tear it apart by using good and well-founded arguments. But if you can’t manage it, please have the intellectual integrity do admit it.